header-logo header-logo

Crown prosecution

14 July 2011 / Michael L Nash
Issue: 7474 / Categories: Features , Public , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Michael L Nash revists the Sultan case to investigate issues of sovereignty & immunity

The recent case of R (Sultan of Pahang) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 616, [2011] All ER (D) 243 (May) raised a number of important issues, legal, political and constitutional. The original case had been brought by the Sultan claiming that, as a head of state, he was entitled to immunity from immigration controls by reason of s 20(1) and possibly s 5 of the State Immunity Act 1978 (the 1978 Act).

Sovereignty

This immediately brought into focus the question of sovereignty, who is a sovereign, and what sovereignty means. This is an issue which has been the subject of serious discussion over a very long period. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648, which brought the Thirty Years’ War to a close, is often considered as a crucial point in the evolution of the concept of sovereignty. It was then that the idea of not interfering in another state’s affairs really gained

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll